It is
believed to have been established in the first century C.E. in the
Mekong delta, which today is Vietnamese territory, although extensive human settlement in
the region may have gone back as far as the 4th century
B.C.E. Though regarded by Chinese envoys as a single unified
empire, Funan may have been a collection of city-states that
sometimes warred with one another and at other times constituted a
political unity. At its height, Funan and all its
principalities covered much of mainland Southeast Asia, including within its scope
the territory of modern day Cambodia and Southern Vietnam, as well as parts of
Laos, Thailand and Myanmar, and
extending into the Malay
Peninsula.

Little is
known about Funan, except that it was a powerful trading state, as
evidenced by the discovery of Roman,
Chinese, and Indian goods during
archaeological excavations at the ancient port of Oc Eo in southern
Vietnam.The capital, initially located at Vyadhapura
(City of the Hunter) near the modern Cambodian town of
Banam in Prey Veng
Province, may have been moved to Oc Eo at a later
time. Most of what is known about Funan is from records by
Chinese and Cham sources dating from the third to sixth centuries
and from archaeological excavations. No archaeological research has
been conducted on this state in Cambodia's Mekong Delta in several
decades, and it is precisely this region that reputedly housed the
capitals of Funan.

Origin

The race and language of the Funanese are not known, but Chinese
records dating from the third century C.E. reveals the same origin
myth of the Khmer people that survives
in modern Khmer folklore. In a tenth-century document of the
Chinese official Rang Tai's visit to Funan in the middle of the
third century C.E. records one of the earliest variants of the
legend. In it, Rang Tai learned that the original sovereign of
Funan was a woman named Liu-Ye. According to the story, Kaundinya
had been given instruction in a dream to take a magic bow from a
temple and to embark on a journey. He did so and went to Cambodia,
where a local queen (Liu-ye) launched an attack on the Brahmin's
boat. With the aid of the divine bow, Kaundinya repelled the attack
and persuaded the defeated queen to marry him. Their lineage became
the royal dynasty of Funan. A similar account is recorded in the
seventh century History of Chin.

Although
the Chinese records shows bias, similar names have been recorded in
stone inscriptions at My
Son dating to A.D. 657. In this Cham version,
the prince is known as Kaudinya and the queen as Soma, the daughter
of the naga king. A Khmer inscription
from the tenth century described the ruling line as descendants of
Sri-Kaudinya and the daughter of Soma. The same origin myth in
modern Khmer folklore gives the name Preah Thaong to the prince and
Neang Neak to the queen. In this version, Preah Thaong arrives by
sea to an island marked by a giant thlok tree, native to Cambodia.
On the Island, he found the home of the nagas and met Neang Neak,
daughter of the naga king. He married her with blessing from her
father and returned to the human world. The naga king drank the sea
around the island and gave the name Kampuchea Thipdei, which in
Sanskrit (Kambuja Dhipati) translates into the king of
Kambuja. In another version, it is stated that Preah Thaong fights
Neang Neak. The continuation of the same origin myth implies that
modern Khmers are descendants of the Funanese people.

The first Khmer inscription dated shortly after the fall of Funan
and those dating to later dates are concentrated in southern
Cambodia suggests that the Khmers already inhabited lowland
Cambodia.

The Australian archaeologist,Michael Vickery, has said: “on present
evidence it is impossible to assert that Funan as an area and its
dominant groups were anything but Khmer”.

History

The
Funanese Empire reached its greatest extent under the rule of Fan
Shih-man in the early third century C.E., extending as far south as
present-day Malaysia and as far west as present-day Myanmar. The
Funanese established a strong system of mercantilism and commercial
monopolies that would become a pattern for empires in the region.
Fan Shih-man expanded the fleet and improved the Funanese
bureaucracy, creating a quasi-feudal pattern that left local
customs and identities largely intact, particularly in the empire's
further reaches.

Organization

Keeping in mind that Funanese records did not survive into the
modern period, much of what is known came from archaeological
excavation. Excavations yielded discoveries of brick wall
structures, precious metals and pottery from southern Cambodia and
Vietnam. Also found was a large canal system that linked the
settlements of Angkor Borei and coastal outlets; this suggests a
highly organized government. Funan, a complex and sophisticated
society with a high population density, advanced technology, and a
complex social system dominated the area of Cambodia because of the
Khmer people's ability to produce food in Cambodia's fertile
plains.

Culture

Funanese culture was a mixture of native beliefs and Indian ideas.
The kingdom is said to have been heavily influenced by Indian culture, maybe through intermediary
kingdoms like Dvaravati or Malayu, and to have employed Indians for
state administration purposes. Sanskrit was
the language at the court, and the Funanese advocated Hindu and, after the fifth century, Buddhist religious doctrines. Records show that
taxes were paid in silver, gold, pearls, and perfumed wood. K'ang
T'ai reported that the Funanese practiced slavery and that justice
was rendered through trial by
ordeal, including such methods as carrying a red-hot iron chain
and retrieving gold rings and eggs from boiling water.

Archaeological evidence largely corresponds to Chinese records. the
Chinese described the Funanese as people who lived on stilt houses,
cultivated rice and sent tributes of gold, silver, ivory and exotic
animals.

K'ang T'ai's report was unflattering to Funanese civilization,
though Chinese court records show that a group of Funanese
musicians visited China in 263. The Chinese emperor was so impressed that he
ordered the establishment of an institute for Funanese music near
Nanking. The
Funanese were reported also to have extensive book collections and
archives throughout their country, demonstrating a high level of
scholarly achievement.

Economy

Funan was Southeast Asia's first
great economy. The Kingdom was rich because of trade and agriculture. Funan grew wealthy because it dominated the
Isthmus of
Kra, the narrow portion of the Malay peninsula where
merchants transported trade goods between China and India. They
use their profits to construct an elaborate system of water storage
and irrigation. Citizens lived relaxed lifestyles. The Funanese
population was concentrated mainly along the Mekong River: the area was a natural region for
the development of an economy based on fishing and rice
cultivation. The Funanese economy depended on rice surpluses produced by an extensive inland irrigation system. Maritime trade also played an extremely
important role in the development of Funan. Archaeological
remnants of what was the kingdom's main port, Oc Eo, were found
to include Roman as well as Persian, Indian, and Greek
artifacts.The German classical scholar Albrecht Dihle believed that
Funan’s main port, identified with Oc Eo, was the Kattigara
referred to by the second century Alexandrian geographer Ptolemy as
the emporium where merchants from the Chinese and Roman empires met
to trade. Dihle believed that Oc Eo best fitted the details
given by Ptolemy of a voyage made by a Graeco-Roman merchant named
Alexander to Kattigara, situated at the easternmost end of the
maritime trade route from the eastern Roman Empire.

Legacy

King Fan
Shih-man, the greatest king of Funan, and his successors sent
ambassadors to China and India. The
kingdom likely accelerated the process of Indianization into
Southeast Asia. Later kingdoms of
Southeast Asia emulated the Funanese court.

During its golden age, Funan controlled modern-day southern
Vietnam, Cambodia, central Thailand, northern Malaysia, and
southern Myanmar. Although Funan collapsed under the pressure
of neighboring Chenla, its capital Vyadhapura
remained the largest and most important urban center in the region
until Angkor
Thom.

The Funan
kingdom had an efficient navy and rose to prosperity by regulating
the sea trade between China and India.

Funan collapsed in the sixth century and was absorbed by the
Chenla kingdom who are undeniably Khmers. Funan is held to be the first Khmer
kingdom and the forerunner of the mighty Khmer Empire. The Khmers and the Funanese share
the same origin myth and under Funan, Cambodia became an indianized
polity which had a profound effect on its culture.

Relations

The
French historian George Coedès
once hypothesized a relation between the rulers of Funan and the
Sailendra dynasty of Indonesia. Coedès believed that the title of "mountain
lord" used by the kings of Sailendra may also have been used by the
kings of Funan, since the name "Funan" is related to the Khmer
"phnom," which means "mountain." Other scholars have rejected this
hypothesis, pointing to the lack of evidence in early Cambodian
epigraphy for the use of any such titles. The Funanese also traded
with the Liang dynasty of southern China.

Little is
known about Funan's political history apart from its relations with
China. A brief conflict is recorded to have
happened in the 270s, when Funan and its neighbour, Champa, joined forces to attack the area of Tongking (which was under chinese control at the
time), located in what is now modern Northern Vietnam. In 357, Funan became a
vassal of China, and would continue as such until its
disintegration in the sixth century. Chenla,
a vassal of Funan eventually absorbed Funan entirely.

Funan rulers

Notes

References

George Coedès, The Indianized States of Southeast Asia
(translated from the French by Susan Brown Cowing). Honolulu: East
West Center Press, 1968.

Claude Jacques, “'Funan', 'Zhenla'. The reality concealed by
these Chinese views of Indochina”, in R. B. Smith and W. Watson
(eds.), Early South East Asia: Essays in Archaeology, History,
and Historical Geography, New York, Oxford University Press,
1979, pp. 371-9.